It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What happened to the people on the flights?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 



This is the complete story in all of it's proper context:
Written by Liz Foreman in February, 2006

I thought it was time to set the record straight on a website error that's gotten out of hand.

I've been getting calls and e-mails for several years, all from folks who have seen my byline on a story (Plane Lands In Cleveland; Bomb Feared Aboard) about Flight 93, the plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field on September 11, 2001.

The story in question, an Associated Press bulletin, was posted on WCPO.com during the morning of September 11, 2001. The story stated that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland. This was not true.

Once the AP issued a retraction a few minutes later, we removed the link.

There were two problems:

1)I only removed the link TO the story. We did not remove the story itself. This was my error probably due to the busy nature of the day - I was the only person updating the website until about noon that day, and things were crazier than they’d ever been.

2) The byline was incorrect. In my haste, I pasted the “Reported by: 9News Staff” byline from a previous story, but this was actually an Associated Press story.

Sometime in 2003 I received an e-mail inquiring about the story. I quickly removed the story, and wrote back to the person, thanking them for the heads up about the incorrect story.

Things didn't stop there.

Messages and phone calls started coming in about "Why did the government make me remove the story?" As is the nature of the net, folks had gotten a hold of the old story and posted it on their own blogs, fueling even more interest in the situation.

So, for everyone who is still wondering about this story, here are some frequently asked questions. I'm hoping this clears everything up once and for all!


FAQ

1. Where did the original story come from?
The story was an Associated Press bulletin that came across the news wires. Associated Press is a news service that many news organizations subscribe to for non-local news. The idea is that a local news organization can’t possibly have reporters everywhere in the world, so for that reason, we publish stories written by Associated Press journalists.

2. So you didn’t report the story yourself?
No, I work at the website in Cincinnati. I generally do not do any reporting out in the field. Also, I was not in Cleveland, nor does WCPO-TV have a Cleveland-based reporter. If you’re not familiar with the geography of Ohio, Cleveland is a good four hours away from us.

There were two problems:

1) I only removed the link TO the story. We did not remove the story itself. This was my error probably due to the busy nature of the day - I was the only person updating the website until about noon that day, and things were crazier than they’d ever been.

2) The byline was incorrect. In my haste, I pasted the “Reported by: 9News Staff” byline from a previous story, but this was actually an Associated Press story.

3. Why didn’t you remove the problem story page from the outset?
My mistake, that’s why. I removed the link TO the story, but didn’t remove the actual story. Then, the story page was indexed by the major search engines. I didn’t even know the story hadn’t been removed until after I was contacted by a member of the public.

4. Why DID you remove the page?
Because it was in error.

5. Why did you create this FAQ page? Isn’t that just fueling the fire?
I’ve been getting a ton of phone calls and e-mails about this recently and answering everyone would make it hard for me to get my day job – running the website – accomplished. Also, unlike the old media paradigm, which is “ignore it and it’ll go away,” the Internet means a two-way conversation with our website users. So, in the interest of media transparency, this is my attempt to clear the air.

And a first hand account from someone on the plane
My husband] and I and six other fellow [...] employees were on the 8 am flight from Boston to Los Angeles on Tuesday, but we were on the Delta flight [1989], the one out of three 8am flights departing Logan that did not get hijacked. Instead, we were forced to make an emergency landing in Cleveland because there were reports that a bomb or hijacking was taking place on our plane. The pilot had radioed that there was suspicious activity in the cabin since one of the passengers was speaking urgently on his cellphone and ignored repeated flight attendant requests to stop using his cell phone while in flight. Also, there was an irregularity in the passenger manifest because there were two people [with the same middle eastern name] who were listed but only one aboard.

[edit on 26-12-2007 by SlightlyAbovePar]




posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Par. Exactly WHO is personally attacking you? No one. Get over yourself and speak your peace.
Regards
John



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by jpm1602
Par. Exactly WHO is personally attacking you? No one. Get over yourself and speak your peace.
Regards
John


John,
Apparently, someone like you.

As people, in this forum particularly, seem to shoot from the hip without really understanding what the other is saying (like you just did) I thought it would be prudent to remind others I am not attacking them personally.

Obviously, as you pointed out to me, it's a waste of time to cover your tracks and do your utmost to be civil.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:07 AM
link   
However, you wasted no time in 'presuming' that it was you I was labeling with a 72 IQ, which could be nothing further than the truth.
Peace
Happy New Year



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by jpm1602
 


Okay, fair enough. No reason for us to bat the same sentiments back and forth. We agree!

What do you think about the clarification about Flight 93 landing in Cleavland, from the person who wrote the story in the first place?



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:23 AM
link   
With all due respect I 'live in Cleveland'. Our own Mayor Mike White had announced flight 93 did indeed land at Hopkins and was reported by all 3 local news channels. They weren't 400 miles away.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:26 AM
link   
postmanpatel.blogspot.com...

What about the passengers?

People who argue the No Plane theory like to bring up
the question, "What about the passengers?" Yes, about
20 % show up in Social Security Death Index as having
died on 9/11/01 and WCPO reports a United flight 93
as landing at Cleveland-Hopkins Airport.

ssdi.rootsweb.com... (80% do not show up)

(So instead of 266 deaths to deal with you now only
have fifty to sixty.)

(copy paste)web.archive.org/web/20021109040132/wcpo.com...



Theres your answer. The officials lied about the dead aswell.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by jpm1602
 


I don't doubt you that everyone reported exactly what you said. Would you agree with me that there were many, many things mis-reported that day?

Do you place any credence in the person who was responsible for that bit of information being created into a news story explaining that it was, among many others, a mistake in the confusion of that morning?

I think (maybe?) we can agree that news outlets were reporting what other news outlets were reporting; without any first-hand knowledge and once they (whomever was doing the actual reporting) looked into said reports, many retractions were issued?

There was a lot of false reporting, reporting rumors, reporting utter speculation, etc that day.

This only takes on a sinister, conspiracy type of thing if you need it to.

[edit on 26-12-2007 by SlightlyAbovePar]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:00 AM
link   
I suppose the jet quarantined far from the gates and tower shown on vid was probably just the Saudis loading up on parma perogies after their little luncheon with 41. Duh, what was I thinking. Your right, I'm wrong, Merry Christmas.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   
It was Flight 1989:

Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 12:19:40 EDT
Subject: A close brush with death and happy to be alive

Dear Friends,

Many of you knew that [my spouse] and I and many [fellow] employees wereon an 8 am flight from Boston to LA on Tuesday morning. I am happy to be alive and to be able to tell you of the events of our harrowing journey. Even though it has been only 48 hours since we departed Logan, it feels as though a lifetime has passed.

[My spouse] and I and six other fellow [...] employees were on the 8 am flight from Boston to Los Angeles on Tuesday, but we were on the Delta flight [1989], the one out of three 8am flights departing Logan that did not get hijacked. Instead, we were forced to make an emergency landing in Cleveland because there were reports that a bomb or hijacking was taking place on our plane. The pilot had radioed that there was suspicious activity in the cabin since one of the passengers was speaking urgently on his cellphone and ignored repeated flight attendant requests to stop using his cell phone while in flight. Also, there was an irregularity in the passenger manifest because there were two people [with the same middle eastern name] who were listed but only one aboard.

After our emergency landing, our plane was directed to go to an isolated area of the airport, and we waited for over two hours in quarantine before FBI agents and bomb sniffing dogs came out to the plane...................................


The COMPLETE e-mail, much longer

[The following article ran in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on 9/12/2001 and talks about flight 1989 and Mayor White's unfortunate remarks on 9/11.]

"Plane diverted to Cleveland triggers alarm FBI finds nothing aboard flight to L.A."

The Plain Dealer -- Cleveland, Ohio
By Patrick O'Donnell - September 12, 2001

Copyright The Plain Dealer 2001

Delta Flight 1989 - with 69 passengers and a crew of nine - was grounded at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport yesterday. It had left Boston en route to Los Angeles. There had been rumors a bomb was on board, but none was found.

A plane diverted to Cleveland Hopkins International Airport yesterday morning was kept sitting on a runway for a couple hours and its passengers were interviewed by FBI agents. But suspicions that the plane had been hijacked or had a bomb on board turned out to be unfounded.

Delta Flight 1989 made an emergency landing at Hopkins about 10:45 a.m., nearly two hours after the World Trade Center towers were hit by two hijacked planes.

Delta ordered the plane to land in Cleveland, according to Cleveland FBI Special Agent Robert Hawk.

He said airline officials wanted the Boeing 767 down because it was traveling from Boston to Los Angeles, the same flight path as two of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center.

At one point, Hawk said, there was confusion about whether there had been an incident on the plane. Delta, he said, told the Federal Aviation Administration there was a problem with the flight.

Delta spokeswoman Cindi Kurczewski declined comment.

In a televised news conference at 11, Mayor Michael R. White first said there was an unconfirmed report that the plane might have been hijacked or was carrying a bomb. But in the middle of the news conference, he reported that it had not been hijacked, and later in the day he said no bomb had been found.

White's office later said that the plane landed as a precaution.
The complete story


[edit on 26-12-2007 by SlightlyAbovePar]



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
For those that insist no plane wreckage was found:













Pioctures released by the perps have no vailidity. The parts are too clena and not fire damaghed enough. They could have filled that pit with parts and then fired a missle into it and there you have it.. Too bad there was no LUGGAGE seen, was there? There is always luggage at any plane crash, and here there is none.

Seats by the hundreds: Missing. Just all sunk away, right? Not in a swamp but a mine area.Unless someone had a giant pile of dirt as soft and fine as sawdust 100 feet deep could a plane disappear into the ground..no way. The perps rely on the controlled media, the CIA assets that are virtually controlling the broadcast industry at certain levels: So many ' journalists' have been on the CIA payroll forever that notrhing but the official line is going to given an respect: All other views, no matter how much proof they contain, are called names and laughed at and denigrated so the perps get away.

This nation is in DEEP trouble, from many fronts, and the worst part is that it is an insidious enemy that flies our flag and mouths the words, while all the time doing what he pleases with total impunity and callous disregard for the rule os law: A new Emporer President. That is what they want: one guy, a Fuhrer figure that all can obey blindly because of their great faith that he is hearing from God himself and is a good a decent and kind man; unable to think of himself when the affairs of state are pressing; duty. Believe it or not, as sickening as it is, as mind boggling as the truth is: There are actually people out there, some 15-20 percent of the population, that think this way.

These are the rabid believers who see no evil and hear no evil and speak evil only when necessary to demonize the liberals and progressives..these drones vote for Repugs exclusively and must think we are living in the early 50's, late 50's at the latest. After that, all politics is decided behind closed doors by the real people: The people hidden behind the dark glass of a big limo while ytou trudge to work.All you voting and party activity and enthusiasm is all for nothing, and only earns the sneering contempt of the power crowd who use pawns , the public, as they wish.

Yeak USA.



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 





Pioctures released by the perps have no vailidity.


That's odd logic. Truthers rely on all sorts of documentation from the very same "perps", if it happens to support their ideas. All the pictures supposedly showing explosions, pods under wings, white cargo planes and holograms should all, also, be dismissed because almost all of them come from MSM outlets. Right?




The parts are too clena and not fire damaghed enough.


Says who? Based off other crashes of a similar nature? Based off of NTSB final reports? Biased of of fuel volumes, energy, mass and speed calculations? Anything other than you saying so?




They could have filled that pit with parts and then fired a missle into it and there you have it


Could have, yes. I wonder why no locals noticed the convoy of strange trucks bringing loads of airplane specific wreckage in. They must have done that at night. Even stranger, nobody reported hearing an explosion when they fired the missile into the pit with the wreckage. Never mind, they mus have used bazookas with unknown, secret silencer technology.





Too bad there was no LUGGAGE seen, was there? There is always luggage at any plane crash, and here there is none.


Honestly, I don't know if this true. I can't prove your statement is false. Can you provide some documentation, some eyewitness testimony, something in the 9-11 commissions report or maybe a new story of some kind supporting this assertion? Keep in mind there were only 37 souls on board, so not a lot of baggage to start with.





Seats by the hundreds: Missing.


Same as above.






CIA assets that are virtually controlling the broadcast industry at certain levels: So many ' journalists' have been on the CIA payroll forever that notrhing but the official line is going to given an respect:



Again, I can't prove this is not true, can you offer anything at all that supports this claim?



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   


Pioctures released by the perps have no vailidity. The parts are too clena and not fire damaghed enough. They could have filled that pit with parts and then fired a missle into it and there you have it.. Too bad there was no LUGGAGE seen, was there? There is always luggage at any plane crash, and here there is none.


At crash scene I was at there were no seats or luggage either -have to
understand that in crash the impact forces act like giant grinder. Anything
over certain size is smashed into small fragments. Small light objects
like personal effects (drivers license, papers, jewelry) tend to survive
the impact. As for "too clean" appearing - landing gear light at crash
scene survived impact and hitting parked car, the lens wasn't even
cracked. I image you can twist that into some sort of conspiracy tale...



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


That is not a complete story. That is a retraction by only one reporter getting her article from AP.

The media, from whom that reporter got her story, was altered the next day. I know that because I saw the "Flight 93 landed in Cleveland" expose on the TV news, and read it in the local newspaper. The next day all the TV stations and newspaper did a flip-flop. They distinctly said on 9/11 two planes were ordered down and two planes landed. That, too, flip-flopped the next day. It was only one plane - Delta - by the next day.



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


Not in Cleveland they were not. Other media outlets were getting their news from Cleveland via the AP satellite office in Cleveland.



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


Well, if the perps weren't so lax in paying attention to details, we would not have any evidence to support our cases. Evidence they boldly handed us working against themselves.



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


That is exactly why BBC didn't retract their "hijackers found alive" story. People who want to believe a conspiracy can have it any way they want it. If it fits the conspiracy it's believable, if it doesn't it's a flip-flop.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 




Suitcases and clothing do NOT get turned into ' tiny shreds ' of anything by hitting the ground. I have seen plane crashes too; in Miami, and there was luggage all over the place. People were arrested for stealing from it and from the dead bodies. In Penn. there is NO LUGGAGE seen in any poictures at all. NONE. Not one suitcase. Not one shirt or dres blowing around. There should be a hoprrif mess there abd all there is , is a 12 foot pit where it looked like a bunch of scrap was buried and exposed when a missle hit it. thats what it LOOKS like, what it IS may be something else but no PROOF or EVIDENCE of any kind has been verified and exhibited by the government to support their fairy tale.

Look at the pictues: Where are the suitcases and clothing? Don't tel me that cloth got torn to tiny shreds and burned up or got buried..we are not stupid..just explain HOW in the hell a huge jet could impact the ground and leave NO large parts to be seen and NO luggage or clothing whatsoever? How? Answer that before you go on to some other conjecture meant to explain the unexplainable..at least by a believers standards.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 01:18 PM
link   
The "airplanes" of the 9-11 were UFOs of technology ET that assumed the appearance of boeings replacing to the true that they were devious by the "triangle" with all their alive passengers...





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join